The function of non-canonical imperatives in the languages of Europe

formal grounds, which is demonstratively invalid). Whether some of its forms correspond to
those of certain moods (predominantly the subjunctive) or not, the imperative is a speech act
since the purpose of making an imperative utterance is to elicit action (this would be the
canonical use of it) rather than convey or request information. The unique limitations imposed
on imperatives as well as the few features that it may have in exclusion compared to other
speech acts makes calling it a mood highly dubious.
The reason behind why we call first and third person and impersonal forms imperatives
to begin with is because they adhere to the same principles, to the same restrictive framework
as canonical imperatives do. For instance, the subjunctive in Spanish may form the first
person plural imperative, but it may not, as opposed to the subjunctive in subordinate clauses
(where it complements the expression of doubt in the main clause, to name but one function)
be posed in the imperfect or future subjunctive and retain the same function at a temporal
variation. The reason why we call them non-canonical is because where all languages have
the ability to directly command someone through the second person imperatives, the first and
third person forms, where they exist, do not generally allow for this canonical function. So
lastly, I would close by remarking that irrespectively of one’s term for these non-canonical,
these first and third person and impersonal imperatives, whether jussive, hortative or by any
other name, they are for all intents and purposes imperatives.
36